Hope4patients,
Thanks, a great video about ShareIntel and how they help companies document their naked short exposure.
- “We’ve seen well over 100% [# of shares owned in the marketplace] over the issued and outstanding, that’s double.”
- “We’ve seen numbers double and triple the reported FINRA short interest.”
- “Brokers in attempt to circumvent SHO, mark their trading tickets long” [when it should be marked short]
- “Borrowing shares from cash accounts, that’s another trick”
- And their service is cheap. 60 days and ~$30K will get you the answer to the naked short question, and it costs ~$50K/yr for continued monitoring.
If the problem is truly big for NWBO, then I see the case for a structural, impossible-to-cover short squeeze. Say it is discovered there is an 80% naked short position over the legally issued and outstanding shares, then this can be a playbook:
- Disclose the discovered 80% naked short position
- Have 30% or more of friendly, long-term shareholders declare in a statement that they do not plan to sell any shares.
- This creates a minimum 10% (only 70% is available to buy, but shorts at 80%) structurally impossible-to-cover situation for shorts.
- The New York Times publishes an article, commemorating the great October 2008 Volkswagon, the mother of all short squeeze example.
- This awakens an army of “wallstreeetbets” type investors ready to pounce. Some may even have been victims of AF’s past deeds and now hold revenge karma.
- On queue, Linda Powers releases any one or a number of PR and price catalysts (SOC, RA approvals, revenue projections, Big Pharma licensing partnerships, and uplisting plans).
- Or the unspeakable, MOASS, there are rumors of a buyout. Shorts will have to cover but are structurally unable to, creating an infinity price-to-cover scenario.
Chiugray